feat(iace): complete CE risk assessment — LLM tech-file generation, multi-format export, TipTap editor
All checks were successful
CI/CD / go-lint (push) Has been skipped
CI/CD / python-lint (push) Has been skipped
CI/CD / nodejs-lint (push) Has been skipped
CI/CD / test-go-ai-compliance (push) Successful in 36s
CI/CD / test-python-backend-compliance (push) Successful in 33s
CI/CD / test-python-document-crawler (push) Successful in 24s
CI/CD / test-python-dsms-gateway (push) Successful in 21s
CI/CD / validate-canonical-controls (push) Successful in 13s
CI/CD / Deploy (push) Successful in 2s
All checks were successful
CI/CD / go-lint (push) Has been skipped
CI/CD / python-lint (push) Has been skipped
CI/CD / nodejs-lint (push) Has been skipped
CI/CD / test-go-ai-compliance (push) Successful in 36s
CI/CD / test-python-backend-compliance (push) Successful in 33s
CI/CD / test-python-document-crawler (push) Successful in 24s
CI/CD / test-python-dsms-gateway (push) Successful in 21s
CI/CD / validate-canonical-controls (push) Successful in 13s
CI/CD / Deploy (push) Successful in 2s
Phase 1: Fix completeness gates G23 (require verified/rejected mitigations) and G09 (audit trail check) Phase 2: LLM-based tech-file section generation with 19 German prompts and RAG enrichment Phase 3: Multi-format document export (PDF/Excel/DOCX/Markdown/JSON) Phase 4: Company profile → IACE data flow with auto component/classification creation Phase 5: TipTap WYSIWYG editor replacing textarea for tech-file sections Phase 6: User journey tests, developer portal API reference, updated documentation Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
@@ -21,15 +21,16 @@ type GateDefinition struct {
|
||||
|
||||
// CompletenessContext provides all project data needed to evaluate completeness gates.
|
||||
type CompletenessContext struct {
|
||||
Project *Project
|
||||
Components []Component
|
||||
Classifications []RegulatoryClassification
|
||||
Hazards []Hazard
|
||||
Assessments []RiskAssessment
|
||||
Mitigations []Mitigation
|
||||
Evidence []Evidence
|
||||
TechFileSections []TechFileSection
|
||||
HasAI bool
|
||||
Project *Project
|
||||
Components []Component
|
||||
Classifications []RegulatoryClassification
|
||||
Hazards []Hazard
|
||||
Assessments []RiskAssessment
|
||||
Mitigations []Mitigation
|
||||
Evidence []Evidence
|
||||
TechFileSections []TechFileSection
|
||||
HasAI bool
|
||||
PatternMatchingPerformed bool // set from audit trail (entity_type="pattern_matching")
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// CompletenessResult contains the aggregated result of all gate checks.
|
||||
@@ -145,10 +146,7 @@ func buildGateDefinitions() []GateDefinition {
|
||||
Required: false,
|
||||
Recommended: true,
|
||||
CheckFunc: func(ctx *CompletenessContext) bool {
|
||||
// Check audit trail for pattern_matching entries
|
||||
// Since we can't query audit trail from context, check if hazards
|
||||
// have been created (proxy for pattern matching having been performed)
|
||||
return len(ctx.Hazards) >= 3
|
||||
return ctx.PatternMatchingPerformed
|
||||
},
|
||||
},
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -265,14 +263,17 @@ func buildGateDefinitions() []GateDefinition {
|
||||
Label: "Mitigations verified",
|
||||
Required: true,
|
||||
CheckFunc: func(ctx *CompletenessContext) bool {
|
||||
// All mitigations with status "implemented" must also be verified
|
||||
// All mitigations must be in a terminal state (verified or rejected).
|
||||
// Planned and implemented mitigations block export — they haven't been
|
||||
// verified yet, so the project cannot be considered complete.
|
||||
if len(ctx.Mitigations) == 0 {
|
||||
return true
|
||||
}
|
||||
for _, m := range ctx.Mitigations {
|
||||
if m.Status == MitigationStatusImplemented {
|
||||
// Implemented but not yet verified -> gate fails
|
||||
if m.Status != MitigationStatusVerified && m.Status != MitigationStatusRejected {
|
||||
return false
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
// All mitigations are either planned, verified, or rejected
|
||||
return true
|
||||
},
|
||||
},
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user